Efandis v The Queen

Efandis was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. Efandis appealed against his conviction and sentence, contending the jury must have entertained a doubt as to his guilt. The appeal was delayed by over five years, and various firms of solicitors provided advice on the merits of the appeal, which was described as having guarded prospects. The appeal was instituted after the deadline for doing so, and the applicant sought an extension of time. The application for an extension was refused by the Deputy Registrar (Legal). The applicant elected to appeal against that refusal. The central legal issues before the court were whether an adequate explanation had been provided for the delay in instituting the appeal and whether the jury must have entertained a doubt as to the applicant’s guilt.

The court held that the applicant had not provided an adequate explanation for the delay in instituting the appeal. The applicant had received legal advice from various firms of solicitors over the years, but these did not provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay. The court found that the applicant had not shown any exceptional circumstances that would warrant an extension of time. The court also held that the applicant had not demonstrated that the jury must have entertained a doubt as to his guilt. The applicant’s belated claim that the verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory did not establish that the jury must have had a doubt as to his guilt. The court found that the applicant had not met the high threshold required to succeed in an appeal against conviction on the ground that the verdict was unsatisfactory.

The court dismissed the appeal against the refusal to grant an extension of time. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence of the applicant were upheld. The court did not make any orders in relation to costs.